Iraq Splinters on Security

Share

Five years since the fall of Saddam Hussein, factions in Iraq's parliament continue to squabble over oil, borders (UPI), and ballots (CNN). But on at least one important matter—security deals between Washington and Baghdad—Iraqis are increasingly in agreement. Opposition to the pacts is growing across Iraq's sectarian divide, as Sunni lawmakers, Shiite clerics, and some militia leaders have come out against U.S. proposals. Issues separating the sides include what role the United States should play in defending Iraq; its efforts to confront terrorist groups; and legal protections for U.S. troops and contractors.

Sunni concerns about the deals are more opaque. Kenneth Katzman, a specialist in Middle East affairs with the Congressional Research Service, says some Sunni factions favor a long-term security arrangement with Washington—in part because of assistance Sunni provinces received to fight al-Qaeda in Iraq, as this Backgrounder explains. But Sunni members of the Iraqi parliament have also fanned out across Washington to express frustration with the negotiations. During congressional testimony on June 4, Sunni political leader Khalaf al-Ulayyan, who heads the National Dialogue Council, called for a timetable for U.S. withdrawal to be included in the negotiations. "I believe most Iraqis are interested in a timetable for the withdrawal, which allows time to rebuild the Iraqi forces," said Ulayyan. The Sunni leader and his Shiite colleague, Nadeem al-Jaberi, presented U.S. lawmakers with a letter signed by a cross section (Washington Independent) of Iraq's parliamentarians all making the same claim.

Left to mediate is Prime Minister Maliki, who is walking a diplomatic tightrope between supporters in Washington, Baghdad, and Tehran, which has close ties to the prime minister. Maliki and President Bush signed a "declaration of principles" in November 2007 that broadly outlined the long-term security issues the two leaders aimed to settle. But during a state visit to the Iranian capital on June 8, Maliki made clear he is sensitive to Iranian concerns. Maliki pledged that Iraq would not become a launch pad (Reuters) for an attack on Iran, a vow that did little to comfort (Tehran Times) Iran's hierarchy.

It remains far from certain whether Iraq's politicians will support or reject the security conditions sought by the United States. Ali Allawi, Iraq's former finance minister, writes in the Independent that the only remaining institution with the power to block the agreement—the Najaf religious establishment—thus far has not come out clearly against the deal. Iraqi political analysts tell CFR.org that Shiite opposition may be little more than pandering in advance of provincial elections this fall. CFR Senior Fellow for National Security Studies Max Boot says approaching Iraqi elections are likely contributing to the logjam, but so is "growing Iraqi complacency." Recent Iraqi military successes may have convinced Maliki "he doesn’t need the Americans after all," Boot writes in the Los Angeles Times. For the United States, Iraq's domestic stalemate could significantly alter future military operations in the country. If a deal isn't brokered by the end of the year, Washington could technically be forced to choose between withdrawing or staying in Iraq illegally. But few military scholars expect such a stark choice, even if the Iraqi impasse goes unresolved. Stephen Biddle, CFR's Senior Fellow for Defense Policy, says any number of scenarios can keep U.S. troops in Iraq in medium-term future.

Independent Task Force Reports

Rates of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and other noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) in low- and middle-income countries are increasing faster than in wealthier countries. The Independent Task Force outlines a plan for collective action on this growing epidemic.

New Council Special Reports

Campbell evaluates the implications of the Boko Haram insurgency and recommends that the United States support Nigerian efforts to address the drivers of Boko Haram, such as poverty and corruption, and to foster stronger ties with Nigerian civil society.

Koblentz argues that the United States should work with other nuclear-armed states to manage threats to nuclear stability in the near term and establish processes for multilateral arms control efforts over the longer term.

The authors argue that it is essential to begin working now to expand and establish rules and norms governing armed drones, thereby creating standards of behavior that other countries will be more likely to follow.

2014 Annual Report

Learn more about CFR’s mission and its work over the past year in the 2014 Annual Report. The Annual Report spotlights new initiatives, high-profile events, and authoritative scholarship from CFR experts, and includes a message from CFR President Richard N. Haass.Read and download »

Now Available: Foreign Policy Begins at Home

The biggest threat to America's security and prosperity comes not from abroad but from within, writes CFR President Richard N. Haass in his provocative new book. More